bardo_sessions_revoke_all

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, which are consistent with revoking all sessions. The description adds useful behavioral context (re-login required) and implies the tool is used in security incidents. No contradiction with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the core purpose and a critical side effect. Every word earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple destructive tool, the description covers the main purpose, a typical scenario, and the post-effect. No output schema is needed. Minor gap: does not clarify the role of session_token, but this is a single optional parameter.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has a single optional parameter (session_token) with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain the parameter's purpose or behavior, leaving ambiguity about whether it's needed for authentication or can be ignored.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('revoke every active session') and the resource ('for your identity'), with a concrete example ('suspected API-key leak'). This distinguishes it from siblings like bardo_session_revoke_current (revokes only current session) and bardo_sessions_list.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides a clear use case ('after a suspected API-key leak') and a notable consequence ('You'll need to log in again afterward'). However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools or state when not to use it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.